As promised in the slavic thread, I decided to create a proposal, which would consist of list of every culture in the mod. I tried to create map as well, but failed to do so. There are however some quite well done maps availible.

Since my knowledge of arabic ethnics is very limited I would leave that, at least now, for later.

My main concerns and solutions:-Blobbing prevention-done by splintering the cultures and possibly by slower assimilation.-Making Caucasus big mess and very hard to control as whole-done.-Making HRE and France less stable-done.-Preventing easy Scandinavia-done by what I mentioned above.-Making Rus' and Italy unification very hard-done.

AND mainly: Making it as close to historical accurate portrayal as possible!

Spoiler:

Last edited by Radetzky on Sat Sep 21, 2013 8:23 am; edited 2 times in total

The Yotvingians, Semigalians, Curonians and (especially) Livs (they are Finno-Ugric!) have nothing to do with medieval Lithuanian. The Yotvingians are West Baltic, close to the Prussians and should use Prussian names. The Semigalians and the Curonians could be regarded as Lettish and have the same names as the Latgalians. The Livs should be in Finnic group with names close to Estonian.

The "Litwin" culture and political identity are from the 16th-19th centuries and has nothing to do with medieval history at all. During early CK2 era (the 9th-11th centuries) the Baltic autochtones of the region were absorbed into the local Krivich, Dregovich and Radimich ethnic groups.

Yes, I was aware that some cultures that are not so close to my main research will be somewhat improvised. Then again, we will probably never get some for example Caucasian people on our forum, so I can only rely on wiki and other secondary sources.

About the Litvin thing- I thought that it could be already applied to the slavic areas captured by Gr. Duchy of Lithuania in middle ages (12th-13th century)- Polotesk, Vitebsk, Navahrudak,.. (might be just Belarus propaganda tho)But of course I can delete it, after all, those are just proposals from a fan, who wishes for a most convincing historical accuracy and plausibity!

Yes the Livs that was a massive oversight on my side.

I would upload the excell table so you can easily see it and change it but can't find any free site without sign-up required. Therefore took updated screen of the Balts, now excluding the Finnic Livs.

Radetzky wrote:About the Litvin thing- I thought that it could be already applied to the slavic areas captured by Gr. Duchy of Lithuania in middle ages (12th-13th century)- Polotesk, Vitebsk, Navahrudak,.. (might be just Belarus propaganda tho)But of course I can delee it, after all, those are just proposals from a fan, who wishes for a most convincing historical accuracy and plausibity!

Yep, this is generally the nationalistic agenda. It is really absurd but Belarusian and Lithuanian nationalists are still battling over the "heritage' of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and this is even affecting science at certain extent.

In reality Litwin culture was (largely) political identity of the local elites during early modern era that survived in a certain way as the self-identification of the szlachta until early 20th cnetury. It would be interesting to add such thing for the elites/nobles but only if the game would start at last somewhere in the 16th century (so no within CK2 time scope at all), and not even as the provincial culture because this supposed to portrait historical antagonism between the upper and lower classes of the society reflected in sphere of mentality and identity.

You know there was somewhat similar thing in the Kingdom of Bohemia where the people of various ethnicities and regional identities identified themselves as "Bohemian" as soon as they were the subjects to the Crown of Saint Wenceslas. And later when the elites switched more towards German language, German (Austrian) political culture etc during the 17th-19th century they still remained "Bohemian" in political sense (but this has nothing to do with modern nationalism naturally). The situation with Litwin identity is very similar in fact.

Radetzky wrote:I would upload the excell table so you can easily see it and change it but can't find any free site without sign-up required. Therefore took updated screen of the Balts, now excluding the Finnic Livs.

In the Xth Century there should be, I think, an Occitano-Romance culture, call it Lemosin or Gothic, spanning from Toulouse into southern Provence, I think. Different from the Gascons, the Northern Provençals and the Auvergnats. The Frankish and Visigothic-descendant nobles in Septimania or Gothia formed a particular culture on their own. Barcelona and future Catalan lands should also be under it.

Radetzky wrote:Okay, I will add it too. Speaking of Goths, I am very intrigued for the Crimean ones, the opportunities!

I have been wondering, should the Occitan culture be kept or be completely replaced by the split into Gascon, Languedocian, Auvergnat, Lemosin and Provencal?

Let's not make it too linguistic, since, as far as I know (Solo will know better), there was not as much difference between Languedocians and Provençals than there was between Gascons and the rest. So I'd make Provençals and Gascons only. It might not be entirely correct to make the Toulousians and Languedocians "Provençals", but that was the name their language recieved in most cases, and while they were said to be of "natio tolosana" or "de natione narbonensis" and similar, those are fossilisations of Roman terminology when writing in Latin. "Occitan" didn't exist, as far as I'm aware, as a term of any kind. The Langue d'Oc, or even the "Terra d'Oc", was used, but Occitania is a modern concept. Provençal seems just much more fitting to the period, especially if we separate the Gascons from the melange.

I also support an Imperial title for all Occitania. The King of Oc. How cool is that? Your spiritual advisor can be the Wizard of Oc.

Radetzky wrote:Thank you for your remarks, I understand it well now, and I will remove litwin once and for all

I wonder about Ruthenian culture, would that be accurate in the time span of the game?

"Ruthenian" (or West Russian) is plausible similar to how English and Neapolitan represented in game. It was the result of developing of local Russian elites culture within special political identity and Central-Eastern European cultural context under the Polish kings and grand dukes of Lithuania. So, I think this is possible, somewhere since 1350s-1400s may be. But it would require some kind of quite complex script to represent certain historical reasons for the local Orthodox elites switching to separate culture, that could be also meet in game.

Last edited by Herr Doctor on Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total

Cèsar de Quart wrote:I also support an Imperial title for all Occitania. The King of Oc. How cool is that? Your spiritual advisor can be the Wizard of Oc.

Well, may be titular king's title?

Of course. But seriously, it's a title that I cannot help but loving. I've probably modded it in every time I've played some eastern Occitan lord. Screw Aquitaine, the count of Toulouse will become the King of Oc!

Made some additions and finished the rest. The arabic and african parts won't be that detailed, you can blame me and my limited knowledge. The end summa is around 150 nations on 867 start. Let's not forget variety is the spice and if my proposal is accepted, it will be revolution in history-based (by that excluding Lux) mods! And it's not just "extra work", it is heavily influencing gameplay, and also great for immersion.

After the crimean Goths found out about another quite well preserved remnants of old culture and added it right in the list! The Pannonian people were still present till around 10th century, bearing vulgar latin names. 867 start map is going to be truly amazing culture-wise! I will try to upload the excel table asap (not quite sure where to though), so you don't have to look at the outdated screens.

I was wondering what culture the Neretva pirates should be. Speculating on Narantine culture, to prevent any nationalism war.

Behold,after several polemics and historical geography seances, I am done! Added some cultures, whose being omited was a big loss in CK2. Some obscure, but historically accurate were added too, which open many opportunities! My reasons for such high numbers were already explained earlier. I would also like to stress out, that both culture (children teaching) and religion conversion should be much harder.

I think Ruthenian culture should have (Old) Russian names which is much historically accurate; the situation similar to Norse culture. The Ukrainian forms are more like from the 17th-19th centuries tradition. Also Ruthenian culture could be also triggered by the Lithuanian rule (or Polish, but only since 1350s).

Rhaeto-Romansh group is better to be merged with Italian into "Italic" (or "Latin") group as they are quite close in traditions and identity despite linguistic differences. At last considering you made Basque "Spanish".

To reinforce and strenghten my appeal to devs for diverse cultures, I am going to try to make names for the new cultures (as I did for the crimean Goths earlier). Is there any "golden standard" of how many names should culture have?